Not being gritty I'll grant you, but how is the whole concept of a guy who clings to walls realistic in the slightest? It's a fantasy, just like the new one.

Click to expand...

That's a specious argument. Countless writers have treated fantastic subjects in a realistic style, by making the elements around the fantastic premise realistic. That's why there's a whole genre named "magic realism." Realistic fantasy or SF is about portraying a world that's like the real world except for one or two fanciful elements, and exploring the ramifications of those fanciful elements in a realistic way. In particular it means treating the characters realistically, having them behave like actual human beings would if faced with a given situation, however impossible that situation may be. For instance, someone getting superpowers and initially deciding to use them to make money is more realistic than someone getting superpowers and instantly going "We've gotta use that power to help mankind, right?" (even though Stan Lee wrote both of those instances within nine months of each other).

Not being gritty I'll grant you, but how is the whole concept of a guy who clings to walls realistic in the slightest? It's a fantasy, just like the new one.

Click to expand...

That's a specious argument.

Click to expand...

Agreed. A specious argument FOR a specious argument.

Countless writers have treated fantastic subjects in a realistic style, by making the elements around the fantastic premise realistic. That's why there's a whole genre named "magic realism." Realistic fantasy or SF is about portraying a world that's like the real world except for one or two fanciful elements, and exploring the ramifications of those fanciful elements in a realistic way. In particular it means treating the characters realistically, having them behave like actual human beings would if faced with a given situation, however impossible that situation may be. For instance, someone getting superpowers and initially deciding to use them to make money is more realistic than someone getting superpowers and instantly going "We've gotta use that power to help mankind, right?" (even though Stan Lee wrote both of those instances within nine months of each other).

Click to expand...

Agreed. That's why I don't know how one could say Raimi's Spiderman wasn't "realistic." It very clearly is.

Well, the Raimi films are realistic in a Marvel sort of way -- they're set in a recognizable version of New York City, but a heightened one, combining naturalistic texture with broad fantasy and melodrama. For instance, nobody would say that the movies' J. Jonah Jameson is a particularly realistic character. He's a larger-than-life, comic figure, the way Stan Lee originally wrote him. And the digital version of Manhattan they created is based on the real one, looks and feels like the real one, but is exaggerated, with more tall buildings for Spidey to swing from and other additions like the elevated tracks in the Spidey/Ock subway fight (which was actually shot in Chicago). So there are plenty of degrees of realism. The Raimi Spider-Man films are more realistic than Burton's or Schumacher's Batman films, but less realistic than Nolan's Batman films or, say, Chronicle.

This doesn't compute for me. People seem to be having selective memory about the 'net for the Raimi films.
Uncle Ben was carjacked and killed.
Mary Jane was going to be mugged...at the least, in the rain at night.
Doc Ock wrecks the O.R. and kills the attendants working on him. He then makes a secret lab in a run down warehouse pier shown to us at night, the grity night.
Flint Marko is a robber on the run from the law
Not to mention broad daylight robberies in the first film montage.
How much more real can you get? I swear in 6 months the revolutionary rewriters about the 'net will be pushing the Raimi movies as flat out Camp Spoofs.

Click to expand...

People got mugged and killed in Burton's Batman movies too, but that would hardly be enough to qualify them as "realistic."

I'm not saying Raimi's Spider-Man was an all-out campfest; just that it was fairly comic booky (in the way Donner's Superman was, or the Avengers).

other additions like the elevated tracks in the Spidey/Ock subway fight (which was actually shot in Chicago).

Click to expand...

Actually, NYC has had an "El" in the past, and parts of it still remain, albeit unused.

Click to expand...

Well, yes, and there are elevated tracks still in use in Queens (which makes me wonder why the movie scene wasn't just set there, considering that Peter Parker lives in Queens). But the point is that the movie used the real New York as a starting point and exaggerated/added to it. It's heightened realism rather than strict realism.

Since Hollywood likes to turn giant comic villains into space clouds (Rise of the Silver Surfer, Green Lantern), why not use Kronos ala JLA/Avengers, so at least the space cloud BS actually comes from the comic this time?